Circumstances in which inferences may be drawn from accused’s failure to mention particular facts when informed that accused may be prosecuted for an offence
182.—(1) Where, in any proceedings in a subordinate military court against a person subject to military law for an offence, evidence is given that the accused on being officially informed that he or she may be prosecuted for the offence, failed to mention any fact, which in the circumstances existing at the time he or she could reasonably have been expected to mention when so informed, the subordinate military court, in determining whether there is a case to answer, and in determining whether the accused is guilty of the offence charged, may draw any inferences from the failure that appear proper.
(2) The failure mentioned in subsection (1) may, on the basis of such inferences, be treated as, or as capable of amounting to, corroboration of any evidence given against the accused in relation to which the failure is material.
(3) In subsection (1), “officially informed” means informed by an investigating officer mentioned in section 177 and empowered by section 178 to investigate into the offence mentioned in subsection (1).
(4) In any proceedings in a subordinate military court, nothing in this section —
(a)
prejudices the admissibility in evidence of the silence or other reaction of the accused in the face of anything said in his or her presence relating to the conduct in respect of which he or she is charged, insofar as evidence thereof would be admissible apart from this section; or
(b)
is to be taken to preclude the drawing of any inference from any such silence or other reaction of the accused which could be drawn apart from this section.